The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. j⚛e decker ^talk 16:17, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Sobel[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Local councillor and Parliamentary candidate and, as such, fails WP:POLITICIAN. Some reliable source coverage exists, but it is either not independent of the source (e.g. Labour Party related) or not significant coverage of the individual. (Note AfDs on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adrian Heald and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamie Hanley (3rd nomination): similar articles created by the same editor.) Bondegezou (talk) 10:55, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The question is whether the subject is notable. Not whether the article is notable. I've added some more material which is independent.Rathfelder (talk) 18:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanking you for developing the article; I'm afraid it still doesn't look notable to me. I don't understand what you mean by, "The question is whether the subject is notable. Not whether the article is notable." Bondegezou (talk) 20:52, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Candidates for office do not qualify for Wikipedia articles under WP:NPOL just for being candidates (nor do city councillors qualify for articles under NPOL just for being city councillors.) If you cannot adequately source that he was already sufficiently notable for a Wikipedia article before becoming a parliamentary candidate, then he does not become notable enough for a Wikipedia article until he wins the election. It is potentially possible for a city councillor in a city the size of Leeds to qualify for an article — he's not entitled to an automatic keep on that basis, but could still be considered sufficiently notable if you wrote a really substantial article about his work as a city councillor and power-sourced it over the WP:GNG hump. But that's not what's been done here — as written, this is barely more than a campaign brochure, and Wikipedia's inclusion rules for politicians (and our content rules governing even the politicians who do qualify for coverage on here) are specifically designed around the principle of weeding out campaign brochures. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 13:50, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A local politician with local news refs. Nothing doing here. Szzuk (talk) 19:09, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 02:49, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:POLITICIAN as a local councillor and candidate. The individual points in what amounts to a CV are not in themselves sufficient for biographical notability, nor is the local media coverage; fails WP:ANYBIO. AllyD (talk) 06:12, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NOTEBLP for non-election coverage, fails WP:POLITICIAN as a candidate for the 2015 election. Just not enough significant coverage in indep. RS. --Bejnar (talk) 21:08, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete being a candidate is not notable. MilborneOne (talk) 12:37, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.